ESPN's Most Disappointing Rookies and Sophomores

[Who]

Do people think that the writers at ESPN (all of them) have an ax to grind with okafor or something? This now makes like 5 different writers there that have ranked him as disappointing this season right? Why do people keep grading him later than the vocal minority on this board? I can't recall another time we felt like people were using an agenda to slam a rookie with statistics before.

I find it quite odd that ESPN writers are being so critical of J.Okafor so soon after rating him so highly around draft time. I don't understand what is different from them to now. All his flaws on display in the NBA were there in the NCAA too. There has been no new information.

Yet Okafor has gone from a near unanimous top 3 selection (several even criticizing LAL for now taking him at #2) to barely scraping in at the end of lists as top 10 rookies in terms of potential.

[Csfan1984]

Should be 3rd and 4th year players. It takes two years to adjust to the NBA.

[Monkhouse]

Do people think that the writers at ESPN (all of them) have an ax to grind with okafor or something? This now makes like 5 different writers there that have ranked him as disappointing this season right? Why do people keep grading him later than the vocal minority on this board? I can't recall another time we felt like people were using an agenda to slam a rookie with statistics before.

I kind of agree. There is a lot of harsh criticism for Okafor, but it also ties into the organization too.

The front office must get the right system, and the veteran environment for Okafor to thrive in.

He is pretty hot headed, and his antics have been very childish. But Okafor has already proved how dominant he can be, thanks to stats from Moranis..  I think Okafor will be a very special player for years to come. His length, plus his hands will allow him to have a good solid career for at a few good years. And you never know Okafor may exceed expectations on defense, we can't judge him too badly over the stats anyways... Who but Okafor, but Okafor alone to beat for the Rookie of the Year award?

I would expect most teams who give that many touches to a rookie, would probably have better stats when he's not in the game. Okafor is being given the opportunity to fast track his growth as an NBA player. Way too early to look at team stats, regarding his impact.

The logic you're using doesn't work for defense that well.

On offense I could agree.

Not that he can't get better but right now he's real, real bad.

I don't think you can say a guy who has shown great promise on the offensive end is a disappointment because he hasn't figured out how to play good NBA defense as a rookie.

especially when no one thought he was going to be a good defender.  I mean that is like saying Smart was a disappointment as a rookie because he was terrible on offense.  Of course he was terrible on offense, but everyone knew he would be.

A guy like Stauskas, however, is a disappointment given he has shot terribly and shooting was supposed to be his strength (and his college stats support that belief).  He belongs on the lsit for that reason, Okafor does not (he is pretty much the player everyone thought he would be).

I don't think Okafor's the player i thought he would be.

Here's a test for you or anyone else: what does Okafor do well?

He is averaging 17 points and 7.5 boards.  That doesn't happen that often for a rookie.  In fact the last rookie to do that was Blake Griffin (though he was a 2nd year rookie).  Blake wasn't much better from the field either and was a poor defender (and played on a better team with better talent).

[colincb]

Here's a test for you or anyone else: what does Okafor do well?

20.2 points per 36 minutes on >50% true shooting.  That's actually quite impressive for a non-shooting big man on a team with a non-existent supporting cast, horrible floor spacing, and the worst point guard play in the league.

He's also second in the league in total post-up attempts and he's got an effective field goal percentage of 46.4% on those attempts, which is about the same as Brook Lopez.  He's scoring about the same number of points per attempt as Brook Lopez and Marc Gasol.

For a rookie, that's impressive.

No it's not impressive to have a TS% of barely over 50% as a center. It's one of the worst TS% among starting centers and both Lopez and Gasol are having the worst shooting years of their careers from the field this season.

[Who]

He is pretty hot headed, and his antics have been very childish. But Okafor has already proved how dominant he can be, thanks to stats from Moranis..  I think Okafor will be a very special player for years to come. His length, plus his hands will allow him to have a good solid career for at a few good years. And you never know Okafor may exceed expectations on defense, we can't judge him too badly over the stats anyways... Who but Okafor, but Okafor alone to beat for the Rookie of the Year award?

I think ROY is between Towns and Porzingis. Towns with a comfortable lead.

Leaning towards Winslow over J.Okafor as 3rd choice.

Then Okafor & Mudiay as 4 & 5.

[PhoSita]

Here's a test for you or anyone else: what does Okafor do well?

20.2 points per 36 minutes on >50% true shooting.  That's actually quite impressive for a non-shooting big man on a team with a non-existent supporting cast, horrible floor spacing, and the worst point guard play in the league.

He's also second in the league in total post-up attempts and he's got an effective field goal percentage of 46.4% on those attempts, which is about the same as Brook Lopez.  He's scoring about the same number of points per attempt as Brook Lopez and Marc Gasol.

For a rookie, that's impressive.

No it's not impressive to have a TS% of barely over 50% as a center. It's one of the worst TS% among starting centers and both Lopez and Gasol are having the worst shooting years of their careers from the field this season.

One of the top post scoring options in the league as a rookie.  Break-even offensive option on a team with zero supporting cast on 18-20+ touches a game.


Yeah, not impressive at all.

[PhoSita]

Do people think that the writers at ESPN (all of them) have an ax to grind with okafor or something? This now makes like 5 different writers there that have ranked him as disappointing this season right? Why do people keep grading him later than the vocal minority on this board? I can't recall another time we felt like people were using an agenda to slam a rookie with statistics before.

I find it quite odd that ESPN writers are being so critical of J.Okafor so soon after rating him so highly around draft time. I don't understand what is different from them to now. All his flaws on display in the NBA were there in the NCAA too. There has been no new information.

Yet Okafor has gone from a near unanimous top 3 selection (several even criticizing LAL for now taking him at #2) to barely scraping in at the end of lists as top 10 rookies in terms of potential.

It's completely silly, and yet also unsurprising.

Guys goes into the draft as a pure back-to-the-basket center.  Known as a very skilled scorer with questions about his shooting touch and especially his defensive ability.

Heads to a team with very few real NBA players on it, and really nobody who can reliably make an entry pass or space the floor.

Pretty impressive as a post scorer.  Struggles mightily in team defense. 

He's so disappointing!  He's not singlehandedly carrying the team to wins!  What a lackluster rookie season!

[PhoSita]

The problem isn't the numbers. The problem is the dumb-ass analysis by these ESPN guys of what those numbers actually mean.

[colincb]

Why did you cut out the section about Marcus smart ?

Smart had very good advanced stats as a rookie, second only to Mirotic in Block +/- and tops in VORP. He's been injured this year and I'm not measuring him for the first half. He doesn't look like he's 100% to me nor would I expect him to be.

In any case, his advanced stats are still positive this year unlike the players cited in this article who have very negative advanced stats.

[Rondo9]

But Smart is having a disappointing year. 

[colincb]

Here's a test for you or anyone else: what does Okafor do well?

20.2 points per 36 minutes on >50% true shooting.  That's actually quite impressive for a non-shooting big man on a team with a non-existent supporting cast, horrible floor spacing, and the worst point guard play in the league.

He's also second in the league in total post-up attempts and he's got an effective field goal percentage of 46.4% on those attempts, which is about the same as Brook Lopez.  He's scoring about the same number of points per attempt as Brook Lopez and Marc Gasol.

For a rookie, that's impressive.

No it's not impressive to have a TS% of barely over 50% as a center. It's one of the worst TS% among starting centers and both Lopez and Gasol are having the worst shooting years of their careers from the field this season.

One of the top post scoring options in the league as a rookie.  Break-even offensive option on a team with zero supporting cast on 18-20+ touches a game.

Yeah, not impressive at all.

Apparently he is to you, but the numbers don't support you.

I suspect he'll be a good player, but not the perennial all-star the Sixers sought. I did expect his numbers would be better and I'm surprised that they are not. Then again, I'm surprised that RJ Hunter's numbers aren't better too. They both look good, but it hasn't translated well to the stat sheet in terms of shooting efficiency.

[Vox_Populi]

They essentially explain their issue with Okafor, right here:

Philly has been outscored by a staggering 19.2 points per 100 possessions with Okafor on the court. If any team played an entire season that poorly, it would shatter the all-time record for futility.

Okafor has little talent around him. The talent he does have, he makes even worse with his horrific defense and black-hole mentality. The problem isn't that he hasn't elevated the Sixers, the problem is that he's made them worse at times.

[tazzmaniac]

Here's a test for you or anyone else: what does Okafor do well?

20.2 points per 36 minutes on >50% true shooting.  That's actually quite impressive for a non-shooting big man on a team with a non-existent supporting cast, horrible floor spacing, and the worst point guard play in the league.

He's also second in the league in total post-up attempts and he's got an effective field goal percentage of 46.4% on those attempts, which is about the same as Brook Lopez.  He's scoring about the same number of points per attempt as Brook Lopez and Marc Gasol.

For a rookie, that's impressive.

No it's not impressive to have a TS% of barely over 50% as a center. It's one of the worst TS% among starting centers and both Lopez and Gasol are having the worst shooting years of their careers from the field this season.

One of the top post scoring options in the league as a rookie.  Break-even offensive option on a team with zero supporting cast on 18-20+ touches a game.

Yeah, not impressive at all.

Apparently he is to you, but the numbers don't support you.

I suspect he'll be a good player, but not the perennial all-star the Sixers sought. I did expect his numbers would be better and I'm surprised that they are not. Then again, I'm surprised that RJ Hunter's numbers aren't better too. They both look good, but it hasn't translated well to the stat sheet in terms of shooting efficiency.

Deandre Jordan TS% is 63% but that doesn't make him a better offensive player than Okafor.  75% of Jordan's field goals are assisted.  Only 40% of Okafor's field goals are assisted.  If you put any other center on the Sixers, their TS% would plummet because of the poor PG play and poor outside shooting.

[colincb]

Here's a test for you or anyone else: what does Okafor do well?

20.2 points per 36 minutes on >50% true shooting.  That's actually quite impressive for a non-shooting big man on a team with a non-existent supporting cast, horrible floor spacing, and the worst point guard play in the league.

He's also second in the league in total post-up attempts and he's got an effective field goal percentage of 46.4% on those attempts, which is about the same as Brook Lopez.  He's scoring about the same number of points per attempt as Brook Lopez and Marc Gasol.

For a rookie, that's impressive.

No it's not impressive to have a TS% of barely over 50% as a center. It's one of the worst TS% among starting centers and both Lopez and Gasol are having the worst shooting years of their careers from the field this season.

One of the top post scoring options in the league as a rookie.  Break-even offensive option on a team with zero supporting cast on 18-20+ touches a game.

Yeah, not impressive at all.

Apparently he is to you, but the numbers don't support you.

I suspect he'll be a good player, but not the perennial all-star the Sixers sought. I did expect his numbers would be better and I'm surprised that they are not. Then again, I'm surprised that RJ Hunter's numbers aren't better too. They both look good, but it hasn't translated well to the stat sheet in terms of shooting efficiency.

Deandre Jordan TS% is 63% but that doesn't make him a better offensive player than Okafor.  75% of Jordan's field goals are assisted.  Only 40% of Okafor's field goals are assisted.  If you put any other center on the Sixers, their TS% would plummet because of the poor PG play and poor outside shooting.

The minutes-weighted average TS% for centers, including the bad ones, is 55.4% and Okafor’s down at 50.6%. That’s a big difference just to be average and more than what I've seen as typical improvement. His rebounding is also below average and his defense is very bad. I don't see him as being a bust, just not likely to be the perennial all-star the Sixers sought (even if he improves by more than a normal amount). Closer to Al Jefferson at the end of the day than was expected.

[PhoSita]

They essentially explain their issue with Okafor, right here:

Philly has been outscored by a staggering 19.2 points per 100 possessions with Okafor on the court. If any team played an entire season that poorly, it would shatter the all-time record for futility.

Okafor has little talent around him. The talent he does have, he makes even worse with his horrific defense and black-hole mentality. The problem isn't that he hasn't elevated the Sixers, the problem is that he's made them worse at times.

My problem with this is holding a rookie to that standard where you expect them to make their team better regardless of the talent around them, or the composition of that talent.

Ever think that the reason the Sixers are so much better without Okafor on the floor might have something to do with just how terribly they are built to play a halfcourt game with Okafor posting up on one end and functioning as the last line of defense on the other?

You have to remember that, to the extent there are players with NBA level experience on that team, they've all come up in a system where they've been taught to just fly up and down the court, get into passing lanes, and constantly look to attack the basket.  In so many ways, they are not set up to succeed in a slower half-court game (which is much harder for young players to learn).

Putting all of the causal emphasis on the individual player for how the team does while they are on the floor is asinine.   This is a problem I have with plus-minus stats in general.  There is a strong tendency to take them to mean far more than they do, or at least to disregard the variety of things that they could mean.



As for the "he's not a perennial All-Star like they thought," thing, well, if they thought that was a guarantee they're stupid.

The comps for Okafor all along have been guys like Big Al, Greg Monroe, Brook Lopez, and best case scenario Pau Gasol.

Back to the basket centers are going out of style in the NBA, but I have no doubt that teams can still have success with talented scorers at the 5 like I just mentioned.  But it requires you to have a team that's properly built to function around a post scorer, and the skillset of players coming into the league is generally not skewed toward succeeding in that type of setup. 

So you need to have a guy that's good enough to justify building your offense that way.  I think Okafor absolutely can be.  But expecting him to raise the play of the team around him when the team around him is pretty much tailor made to emphasize his weaknesses and fail to take advantage of his strengths ... the problem there is not Okafor, it's you.